West to use possible military action against Gaddafi

[-:Undertaker:-]

The looking like heros part really makes it all worth it.

Shame you've completely neglected to mention the fact that you'd be helping those poor Libyans out, though.

But we don't really mean to help them out because we are the ones who have been supporting their regimes for decades upon decades, the same goes for Mubarak and Ben Ali and Saudi Arabia. So to pretend that, now, because the Libyans are finally fighting for freedom against the regime we supported that somehow we are and have been on their side is nothing but bandwagon hypocrisy designed to save the west face. As I said before, have a genuine moral foreign policy in the first place and you may have an argument, but as it is it is nothing but backstabbing and deceit. These actions are what afterall fuel resentment in the Middle East against the western world, leading to events such as 9/11.

I have been probably the strongest critic of these regimes on this forum over many years, while the neocons and supporters of liberal interventionalism on here and in world affairs have been the ones supporting the U.S.-supported regimes of Ali, Mubarak and so forth - now that these regimes are collapsing, it simply will not do for you to all turn around and say "hey, thats what we wanted".

The Libyans started this revolution (a revolution western politicians did not want), let the Libyans finish it the way they want.

[The Don]

But we don't really mean to help them out because we are the ones who have been supporting their regimes for decades upon decades, the same goes for Mubarak and Ben Ali and Saudi Arabia. So to pretend that, now, because the Libyans are finally fighting for freedom against the regime we supported that somehow we are and have been on their side is nothing but bandwagon hypocrisy designed to save the west face. As I said before, have a genuine moral foreign policy in the first place and you may have an argument, but as it is it is nothing but backstabbing and deceit. These actions are what afterall fuel resentment in the Middle East against the western world, leading to events such as 9/11.

I have been probably the strongest critic of these regimes on this forum over many years, while the neocons and supporters of liberal interventionalism on here and in world affairs have been the ones supporting the U.S.-supported regimes of Ali, Mubarak and so forth - now that these regimes are collapsing, it simply will not do for you to all turn around and say "hey, thats what we wanted".

The Libyans started this revolution (a revolution western politicians did not want), let the Libyans finish it the way they want.

I think when they start spraying bullets into crowds of inncoent people who what freedom, that's when we should step in, and when has civil war nearly broke out over there before for us to have helped?

[GirlNextDoor15]

I think it's stupid for those who think that British and other Western countries are there to help them because of the stupid reason, world peace. It is so OBVIOUS that they are not there to help them because of world peace. What I mean is can't you see the impacts of the uprising in Libya? Not only some of protesters there died but even world petrol price increases drastically and that is why British and other Western countries like America are sticking their noses into other people's business. It is a good chance for them to interrupt other countries' affairs and then take charge of the whole country just like what happened in Iraq or Afghanistan. America took charge of the whole country just because they assumed Osama bin Laden was still in Iraq and Saadam Hussein had nuclear weapons in his country. What are the reasons? 'We want world peace', according to George W. Bush. Then, at the end what did they get? 9/11 tragedy because al-Qaeda hated America in interrupting their affairs. Same goes to here. British and other Western countries want to interrupt their affairs just because of world peace. But what I think is world peace to them is taking control of world economic and not letting the price of oil affecting their country. If British and other Western countries invade Libya with no other concrete support other than their weak military force, this will definitely end up like what happened in America. Before they start sending British troops to Libya, they should at least discuss their plans with other countries including ASEAN countries.

[AgnesIO]

I think it's stupid for those who think that British and other Western countries are there to help them because of the stupid reason, world peace. It is so OBVIOUS that they are not there to help them because of world peace. What I mean is can't you see the impacts of the uprising in Libya? Not only some of protesters there died but even world petrol price increases drastically and that is why British and other Western countries like America are sticking their noses into other people's business. It is a good chance for them to interrupt other countries' affairs and then take charge of the whole country just like what happened in Iraq or Afghanistan. America took charge of the whole country just because they assumed Osama bin Laden was still in Iraq and Saadam Hussein had nuclear weapons in his country. What are the reasons? 'We want world peace', according to George W. Bush. Then, at the end what did they get? 9/11 tragedy because al-Qaeda hated America in interrupting their affairs. Same goes to here. British and other Western countries want to interrupt their affairs just because of world peace. But what I think is world peace to them is taking control of world economic and not letting the price of oil affecting their country. If British and other Western countries invade Libya with no other concrete support other than their weak military force, this will definitely end up like what happened in America. Before they start sending British troops to Libya, they should at least discuss their plans with other countries including ASEAN countries.

To screw with your beliefs..

America invaded Iraq AFTER 9/11.

Also, it is Asian nor Asean.

[efq]

Um. I don't know what to say. Aren't we just managing to reduce the amount of british troops we have out now? It'll only end up with us losing troops to getting stuck there. I mean a warplane bombed a Libyan village the other day. Let someone near them fight it for them.

I know we are a good country, we like to help when we can but we've got to let some countries do something as well, we can't be depended upon at every crisis.

[ifuseekamy]

Um. I don't know what to say. Aren't we just managing to reduce the amount of british troops we have out now? It'll only end up with us losing troops to getting stuck there. I mean a warplane bombed a Libyan village the other day. Let someone near them fight it for them.

I know we are a good country, we like to help when we can but we've got to let some countries do something as well, we can't be depended upon at every crisis.

Yeah, when did Spain last absolve their post-imperialism guilt?

[efq]

Yeah, when did Spain last absolve their post-imperialism guilt?

I'm not clever enough to know if that was for or against me :p

[Jordy]

An SAS unit was being held by rebel forces in Libya last night after a secret mission to put British diplomats in touch with leading opponents of Muammar Gadaffi ended in humiliation.

The soldiers — up to eight men — were captured as they escorted a junior diplomat through rebel-held territory in the east of the country.

This news isn't on other news outlets yet and I would link but The Sunday Times is behind a paywall so my extract will have to do.

This is incredibly embarrassing, it's the opposition who have taken them. Cameron's attempt to take lead of the situation and intervene with the opposition is now nothing more than a joke. The Dutch had a similar situation a few days ago and they've been criticised enormously, and now we have to end up medalling as well! The SAS who are considered some of the toughest troops in the world are now nothing more than a joke as well.

Government resignation perhaps..?

[xxMATTGxx]

The Ministry of Defence says it will not comment on a claim in the Sunday Times that members of the SAS have been seized by rebel forces in Libya.

The paper claims the unit was involved in a secret mission to put British diplomats in touch with rebels trying to topple Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.

It says eight SAS men, in plain clothes but armed, were captured as they escorted the diplomat in eastern Libya.

In a statement, the MoD said: "We do not comment on the special forces."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12658054


I guess we will never know if it's true they have been captured if they don't comment on the SAS.

[xxMATTGxx]

Sky sources: Eight special forces soldiers captured in Libya by rebels are likely to be released later today